Are these verb phrases ('to give effect…', to + verb + into + effect) containing 'effect' prolix and tortuous? Why not simply use 'to effect'? They transpire to suggest that there may be differences?
I originally asked the above. User FumbleFingers kindly replied:
You give effect to X when X is something that already "exists", but hasn't YET been "activated" so it will actually do whatever it's intended to do (such as a plan that hasn't been put into practice yet). Often when you effect X, you cause X (which didn't previously "exist") to come into being. The idea that all "longer" phrasings are prolix, tortuous or otherwise "undesirable" is a serious misconception.
I accept this, but am still confused about the other case where X already exists. User StoneyB answered:
To give effect to something or put it into effect is to cause that something to become capable of producing effects.
But how does this differ from effect? To use StoneyB's example, If I effect a change in my lifestyle, then this change itself can 'cause [that something] to become capable of producing [further] effects'?
Best Answer
I basically agree with SoltBegins, but let me state it a different way.
To "give effect to" something is to make it work, to make it carry out its desired intent.
To "effect" something (as a verb) is to bring it into existence or make it happen.
So if you said, "Mr Smith effected an agreement between the parties", that would mean that Smith managed to convince the parties to come to some compromise. Like, he convinced them that they should each pay half the cost. If you said, "Mr Smith gave effect to the agreement between the parties", that would mean that he did something to make the agreement actually happen, like he collected the money from each of them.
Addendum
To try to answer your question:
By "make it happen" here I mean something along the lines of "bring it into existence". Maybe it would have been more clear if I'd just left it at "bring it into existence".
"Give effect to" specifically means to cause something that previously existed only as an idea or on paper to actually happen. We routinely talk about "giving effect to a contract" or "giving effect to the new law".
To "effect" simply means to cause, or cause to exist. Sometimes, often, causing something to exist and making it happen are the same thing. When we say "Smith effected X" we often mean that he both caused it to exist and caused it to produce the desired outcome. If, for example, you say "I effected an update to the document", making the update exist and making it actually change the document are probably a single event, you can't separate them out. So in a given case,
whether "to effect X" means to create a concept that is not yet actually happening in the real world,
or if it means both to create the concept and to really make it happen, depends on the context.
In the case of an agreement, if all the parties are truly willing it might be that once the agreement is made, they all go off and do whatever, and no one thinks of a separate step of giving effect to the agreement. It just depends on context.